| home | about | legislation | churchwide assembly |
Responses to the ELCA Social Statement and Ministry Recommendations
Members from many roles in the ELCA have weighed in on the Social Statement and Ministry Recommendations. Read some of their responses below.
Bishop Peter Rogness (St. Paul Area Synod) endorses Proposed Social Statement and Recommendation on Ministry Policies
See Bishop Rogness' May 29, 2009 report to the St. Paul Area Synod Assembly.
Appropriate Next Steps for the ELCA
Well over 100 teaching theologians have commented on the ELCA Social Statement on Human Sexuality and making their own clarifying statements about the relevance and adaptability of the report and recommendations on rostering of clergy in faithful and committed same-gender relationships.
An Open Letter From Lutheran Seminarians to the Bishops of the ELCA
Seminarians studying in eighteen seminaries and divinity schools across the country have raised a collective voice in support of the Recommendation on Ministry Policies made by thte Task Force for the ELCA Studies on Sexuality.
An Assessment of the Statement on Human Sexuality & Recommendations on Ministry Policy
By Herbert Chilstrom, Former ELCA Presiding Bishop
Bishop Peter Rogness (St. Paul Area Synod) endorses Proposed Social Statement and Recommendation on Ministry Policies
An excerpt from Bishop Rogness’ May 29, 2009 report to the St. Paul Area Synod assembly:
“[T]he key to being church together is not eliminating all tension; the key is in being grounded in the center of the faith and trusting that God is greater than our own questions and differences. The diversity enriches us if we are clear about what it is that grounds us, binds us together, gives us life. This is not your church or mine, this is the church of the God we have come to know in Jesus Christ, the church that is given life not by the rightness of all our decisions, but by the presence of the Holy Spirit. I believe the recommendations of the task force are a faithful response to that movement of the Spirit, and will serve this church well.
“My hope is that for the new life that beckons, we take this step. I hope we say, with the apostles facing hard decisions in Acts 15, ‘It seems good to the Holy Spirit and to us…’ And I hope that if that happens, those of you for whom this is not a desired step would look to the counsel of Gamaliel in that same Book of Acts, who cautioned those who would stomp out this new sect of Christ-followers: ‘Let it be—if it is of God we ought not fight it, and if it is not, it will fall.’ It is not an unfaithful thing to let God’s time unfold.”
See the full text here.
Appropriate Next Steps for the ELCA
We the undersigned ELCA teaching theologians, and Christian theologians teaching at ELCA institutions, wish to affirm and support the four recommendations on Ministry Policies proposed by the Task Force for ELCA Studies on Sexuality to the 2009 Churchwide Assembly in Minneapolis (Report and Recommendation on Ministry Policies available at: http://www.elca.org/What-We-Believe/Social-Issues/Social-Statements-in-Process/JTF-Human-Sexuality/Report-and-Recommendation.aspx).
We take this action on the basis of the rationale on lines 147-212 of the Task Force’s document, and we would specifically highlight the following points:
• We too affirm the authority of the Scriptures, but the seven biblical texts that are frequently cited on the issue of homosexuality are not directly pertinent to the 21st century discussion because some of them condemn specifically homosexual rape, deal with questions of “clean and unclean” that are not normative in the Christian community, do not take into account issues like “sexual orientation,” and presuppose that all would agree with a particular interpretation of what “nature” teaches.
• The Task Force wisely proposes that both heterosexual and homosexual persons are expected to express sexual intimacy within publicly accountable, lifelong, and monogamous relationships. This has long been the expectation for heterosexual couples, and therefore is an appropriate expectation for homosexual couples as well.
• The first recommendation of the Task Force rightly proposes that acceptance of same-gender relationships among all people of this church is a prerequisite to considering people in same-gender relationships for rostered leadership positions.
• While not all Lutheran church bodies are of one mind on these issues, Scandinavian and German Lutherans have already taken similar actions to those being proposed now in the ELCA.
• We who favor the changes being proposed pledge ourselves to honor and respect those sisters and brothers within the ELCA who for reasons of theology and conscience choose to oppose these changes.
• We recognize that the unity of the church is based on one Lord, one faith, and one baptism, and that within this unity, faithful members may disagree on individual items of faith and life.
Specifically we make the following affirmations to the questions posed by the Task Force:
1. Should the ELCA commit itself to finding ways to allow congregations and synods that choose to do so to recognize, support, and hold publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships? Yes.
2. Should this church commit itself to finding a way for people in publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships to serve as rostered leaders of this church? Yes.
3. Can this church as it finds a way to roster people in publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, and same-gender relationships commit to doing so in ways that bear one another’s burdens, love the neighbor, and respect the bound consciences of those with whom they disagree? Yes.
4. Should the ELCA consider structured flexibility in decision-making to allow in appropriate situations, people in publicly accountable, monogamous, lifelong, same-gender relationships to be approved for the rosters of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America? Yes.
See the theologians who signed on to support this statement here.
An Assessment of the Statement on Human Sexuality & Recommendations on Ministry Policy
by Herbert Chilstrom, Former ELCA Presiding Bishop
The ELCA Assembly in Minneapolis in August will have two important proposals to consider regarding human sexuality. I endorse both of them. Like many others in our church, I’ve spent a good deal of time reviewing these documents. I’m impressed with the work of the Task Force. After some 20 years of wrestling with this complex and potentially divisive issue, I believe they have given us a Statement and a set of Recommendations the broad membership of our church can accept.
The proposed Statement – Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust – affirms the kinds of things many of us have supported for years. Among them:
• It witnesses to the goodness of human sexuality as a gift from God.
• It looks to Scripture and the traditions of the Lutheran church for guidance in this important area of our lives, recognizing that each new generation must determine how to apply those principles.
• It lifts up trust, faithfulness and commitment as foundations for healthy relationships.
• It underscores the importance of the lifelong and legal aspects of heterosexual marriage.
• It is honest about the complexities of human sexuality as well as its negative aspects and our sinful use of this gift from God.
• It recognizes the need to affirm our gay and lesbian sisters and brothers as well as same-gender oriented persons in their quest for lifelong relationships.
• It urges caution when developing physical intimacy, reminding partners that it must be matched with growing affection and commitment.
One of the key ideas in the proposed Statement is the phrase “conscience-bound belief.” We are urged to respect the “conscience-bound belief” of those who disagree with us.
This concept, of course, is not new. In fact, we live with it all the time. To take but one example: My closest friend and I disagree on the legitimacy of the death penalty. One of us has a “conscience-bound belief” that the heinous murder of an innocent child justifies the death penalty. The other, also relying on a “conscience-bound belief,” thinks it is always wrong to ask the state to take a life on behalf of all of us. Each of us has come to our conclusions on the basis of our commitment to the Bible, tradition and, as Luther expressed it, “plain reason.’ Though we disagree on this specific social issue, our respect for each other keeps us in close friendship. We agree to disagree on this subject.
This kind of freedom to differ is especially critical, of course, in relation to the status of homosexual persons in our church. It is not likely that we will come to consensus on this issue in the near future. But can we disagree in this area without breaking faith and unity with each other? Yes, I believe we can.
The proposed statement suggests that not only are we to respect the “conscience-bound belief” of individuals; we are also called on to respect the “conscience-bound belief” of congregations and synods.
We all recognize, of course, that as individuals and as a church we sometimes change our minds about “conscience-bound” stances. Churches that once excluded minority persons now openly welcome them. Congregations that once refused to call women as pastors now accept and affirm them. Only a few years ago only persons who had been confirmed could receive the Lord’s Supper. Now younger children are encouraged to participate.
It seems clear that in the more than 20 years since the ELCA first tried to adopt a statement on human sexuality many have also changed their minds regarding the place of homosexual persons in church and society. Change was not easy. Long tradition, rooted in our understanding of the Bible, meant that we clung tightly to our convictions. But as we became acquainted with gay and lesbian persons and read literature about the nature of sexual orientation many came to a new understanding of the issues. We changed our minds.
That leads to the second proposal the forthcoming Churchwide Assembly will consider: Recommendations on Ministry Policies. I believe the task force has put before the church a way to respect our varied positions.
For those who have difficulty in understanding the sequence of the four Recommendations, an analogy may be helpful:
Forget about homosexuality for a moment. Suppose the discussion were about dancing. Yes, believe it or not, dancing was the hot button issue when I was a college student a half-century ago.
This would be the sequence:
Step 1 – Can we agree that persons who dance are not sinful in some unusual way?
Step 2 – If so, may we talk about whether it is right or wrong to dance?
Step 3 – If so, can we have our conversation about dancing and respect our different opinions about it?
Step 4 – If so, can we live together with respect in the same community, allowing for some to dance and some not to dance?
At the risk of oversimplification, this is what the Recommendations call for.
Step 1 – Do we agree that homosexual persons are not sinful in some unusual way?
Step 2 – If so, may we agree to discuss their role in the life of our church?
Step 3 – If so, may we agree to respect our differences as we discuss this matter?
Step 4 – If so, may we agree that in our church some congregations and synods may call gay and lesbian persons in same-gender relationships to the ministries of this church, without expecting others to do the same?
Each step must be approved before the Assembly can go on to the next.
I wish everyone in our church were at the place where we could simply say, “It is time to include responsible brothers and sisters in Christ in same-gender relationships among the rostered ministries of this church.” That is, for me and many others, our “conscience-bound belief.”
But I am a realist. Though we have taken some significant steps in the last 20 years, our church is not at the place where we can do more than what is proposed in the Recommendations. If they are adopted by the Churchwide Assembly they will open the door for us to be more honest. We are a diverse church, held together by our common belief that we are made right with God by grace alone and the gift of faith in Jesus Christ. Within that confession, we learn to live together in unity with our differences.
We can no longer go on with the status quo, with one bishop trying to press the literal implications of our current policies and another looking the other way.
These Recommendations finally give at least some of our bishops, synods and congregations the integrity they long for in openly welcoming our talented and deeply committed sisters and brothers into our family of shepherds and servants of the Gospel.
I pray we will move ahead and approve the Statement and Recommendations with grace and love.
| home | about | legislation | churchwide assembly |